Scrolls of Scrooge: Canon
This page is a helpful guide to what canon is and what is canon! (No, those two don't mean the same thing!) And more! '‘Any Sufficiently Advanced Fanwork Is Indistinguishable From Canon’' Quick, which of this image or this one is fan art, and which is an official promotional picture of the Duck Avenger ? You couldn't tell, could you? Well, after a point, neither can we. If a fan work — a comic, or a film, or a cartoon, or an audioplay — is virtually well-put-together enough, and consistent enough in tone with official Disney comics work, that it could as well have been endorsed by Disney — '''and '''if it breaks no continuity from official works… then for the purposes of this Wiki, it can be canon. This goes double if the story is the work of a professional artist '(as is the case, for instance, of the short film ''Followed from the Mansion, or Sarah Jolley’s "doodle comics" featuring the Duckburg cast). 'This policy ''also applies to non-Disney, officially-released works which are meant by their creators as unofficial sequels to canonical Disney works. Filmation's Happily Ever After, for example, falls under this policy, as it was meant as an unofficial sequel to Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. This is a "secondary tier" of canon, of course — if there surfaces an official work which contradicts it, even if it is posterior to the fanwork, then the official version will take precedence. 'Unofficial Works by Official Authors; Approval of God' The second-tier canon outlined above for fan works of significant value should not be confused with non-licensed works by official authors, which is considered to be equivalent to their authorized Disney work, canonically-speaking. Carl Barks's Joe Cowles' Popcorn Popper, for instance, is just as valid a comic story as any one-pager he did, and stuff on Frank Angones and the Suspenders of Disbelief might as well have been said right in DuckTales 2017. To an extent, this also goes for ‘approved fanworks’ — a term which here means fanworks which, regardless of quality, have been endorsed or otherwise approved-of by official creators. For example, the comic gag Dart Guns may not have been quite notable or professional-looking enough for consideration on the Wiki, and its authors are certainly not notable professional authros, but Francisco Angones (one of the creators of ''Woo-oo!'' for which it acts as an epilogue) stating his hearty approval of it on his blog makes it de-facto canon. 'Crossovers' Among Disney properties, a crossover signifies that the Disney property crossing over with Disney comics is canon to Disney comics, and thus it falls within the scope of the $crooge McDuck Wiki. For that reason, most of the Walt Disney Classics are considered canon. Moreover, regardless of licensing, a crossover between Disney comics and another franchise is usually taken to mean that that franchise exists in the same universe. It thus falls within the scope of the Wiki. For that reason, the following non-Disney comic series are covered on the Wiki: *''Asterix'' *''Spirou & Fantasio'' (and spin-offs) *''The Adventures of Tintin'' This is not the case if the situation matches one of the following two cases: *'The crossover is done through dimension-traveling' or some other such method. :::When this is the case, the over-crossing franchise's world would technically be worthy of coverage on the Wiki as a parallel universe, but it is best to instead link most relevant concepts and characters to their pages on that franchise's Wiki. ::: :::However, if one or more elements of the over-crossing franchise are given history in the crossover which that franchise's wiki does not cover (for example, because of canon policy different from ours), it is better that this information go somewhere rather than nowhere, and so pages about those specific elements should be created here. (Hence, for example, Doctor.) *'The crossover is a nod that clearly does not entail that the entire world of the over-crossing franchise exists in the Disney comics universe.' :::For example, Fluffy and Mervin make a cameo in a Disney comics narrative as members of the Legion of the Chartreuse Tortoise. However, their world is clearly incompatible with Disney comics, and it is an unspoken fact that the “Fluffy and Mervin” comics could not have happened per se prior to the Disney story, only an approximation of it. Thus, “Fluffy and Mervin” as a whole is not a canon source on this Wiki. Another important thing to note is that if Disney does not own a license to both parties, a crossover with a crossover is null and void. For instance, if Asterix (canon to us through a crossover) crossed over with a different non-Disney series like Lucky Luke, this would not, on its own, make Lucky Luke canon for our purposes. 'Novelizations & Adaptations' Novelizations and adaptations of a canonical story are fully canonical. The original does not “trump” the new version in any way. For example, The Great Mouse Detective shows Professor Ratigan falling to his apparent death from Big Ben, with later stories building on this event to show him survive unbeknownst to Basil. The comic strip adaptation instead shows him nearly falling and being rescued (and arrested) by Basil. Though the two accounts conflict, we will not make a choice. Simply say in the relevant section of Ratigan's biography that “'according to another account,' it had always been known to Basil that Ratigan had survived, as he himself…” However, if a story and its adaptation conflict too heavily, it is better to consider them two different stories for in-universe purposes, though the Behind-the-scenes section will acknowledge the connection. For example, the 1934 comic strip The Wise Little Hen was supposedly the adaptation of The Wise Little Hen, but while it shared a cast and setting, had a completely different plot; thus we forego “by another account” language and cover both stories separately, as two different adventures that both happened to Mrs Cackle, Donald Duck and Peter Pig. 'Deleted Scenes' There is no blanket ban on deleted scenes being canonical, but only if they fulfill the two following criteria: :1. They have been released as a distinct entity. ::: What we mean by “released as a distinct entity” is, most commonly, that it has been released as a special feature on a DVD release, rpobably with wtheir own title. :::If a deleted scene leaks on the Internet, or if you have access to an old workprint of a film which includes eventually-deleted scenes, the deleted scenes don't constitute “stories” per se, and cannot have pages of their own about them. Document them in the “Behind the scenes” section of the relevant film. :2. They could be slotted back in the movie with minimal editing. :::This mostly means scenes that were cut for time, but, for all we know, could have happened on-screen. Of course, perhaps tiny bits of continuity in the final print seem like they indicate the scene didn't happen, but that doesn't count. :::Alternate takes on specific scenes are also allowed under this rule. For example, returning ”Why Me?“ to “Aladdin” would simply mean swapping the finished “Jafar's Hour” scene for this one, with no changes required to other parts of the film. :::An example of a scene that fails Rule 2 is “Jasmine and Aladdin's First Meeting”. It was definitely released as a story, with its own title and everything, and therefore passes Rule 1. But putting it back in the film would require massive changes to the way Jasmine's arc is structured, not just putting in the place of the in-film scene of Aladdin and Jasmine's first meeting. So we have a page on the short, but it's non-canonical. :3. It's not directly contradicted by non-deleted-scene sources. ::: If a deleted scene's creator went out and said, “this almost happened, but it didn't, so it's not canon”, we'd believe them. Obviously. Once you have made sure your deleted scene passes the three rules above, you can add information from it to the relevant in-universe pages. If it's a scene that was cut for time or some such, it likely functions identically to a "midquel", and you should have no trouble using it as a source. If it's an alternate version of a scene, however, you may have a little more trouble. In cases where the deleted scenes thus conflicts with the finished product, both versions are equally valid; treat them as two different accounts of the same event, not unlike how you would treat a novelization. Category:Scrolls of Scrooge Category:Rules Category:Policy Category:Scrooge McDuck Wikia